German Court Rules Against BioNTech in Major Vax Injury Case
In the latest blow to BioNTech’s stonewalling tactics, Germany’s Oberlandesgericht Hamm (Higher Regional Court of Hamm) has overturned a lower court ruling that had dismissed key aspects of a plaintiff’s claim for severe health damage from the Comirnaty mRNA COVID-19 vaccine
OLG Hamm is a higher regional appellate court in North Rhine-Westphalia that hears appeals from lower district courts (Landgerichte) in civil and criminal cases.
The decision, handed down today, April 21, 2026 (case I-26 U 57/25), fully reverses the Landgericht Arnsberg’s February 2025 judgment (Az. I 1 O 232/23) and remands the case back for proper fact-finding.
In other words, a higher German court just sided with a vaccine-injured person, threw out the lower court’s rejection of their case, and ordered the case to be properly re-examined with real evidence instead of being quickly dismissed.
This is a significant win for injured plaintiffs, as it reinforces that courts must take their claims seriously and can no longer rubber-stamp BioNTech’s position without proper review.
Lead Counsel Announces Win
Attorney Tobias Ulbrich, lead counsel for the plaintiff and vocal advocate for vaccine-injured Germans, announced the victory directly from the courthouse steps.
In his statement, Ulbrich explained that the Hamm senate ruled the Arnsberg court had “misconstrued the requirements regarding the burden of exposition and the interlinking with the claim for information and its prerequisites.”
Crucially, the senate criticized other courts—particularly the Oberlandesgericht Brandenburg—for completely misunderstanding the scope and impact of the BGH decision.
The Hamm judges signaled they will rule the same way in identical future cases, urging parties to consider written proceedings to avoid unnecessary hearings.
Ulbrich noted the ruling “is likely to serve as a signal to all regional courts that they have substantially overreached in their treatment of people who have suffered severe health damage, and that pharmaceutical allegiance must now yield to common sense in this regard.”
This ruling builds directly on the procedural earthquake now shaking German vaccine injury litigation.
Just days ago, on April 15, 2026, the Regional Court of Aurich (case 5 O 1106/24) ordered BioNTech to hand over 32 categories of internal safety, toxicity, and manufacturing records on Comirnaty—including lipid nanoparticle effects, spike protein behavior, batch variability, residual DNA, biodistribution, genotoxicity, cancer mechanisms, and sex-based risk differences.
That partial judgment affirmed injured plaintiffs’ right to the very manufacturer data long denied them.
Together, the Aurich disclosure order and today’s Hamm reversal demonstrate a seismic shift: German courts are no longer willing to let vaccine-injured plaintiffs fight with one hand tied behind their backs.
Regulatory approval no longer shields BioNTech from scrutiny, and lower courts ignoring the BGH precedent are being slapped down.
The plaintiff in the Hamm case—like so many others represented by Ulbrich’s firm—alleges life-altering post-vaccination injuries with no prior history.
The case is not over, but the path to real accountability just got a lot clearer.
Pharma can no longer hide the data, and the injured no longer have to prove the impossible without it.
See more here substack.com
Bold emphasis added
Header image: RND